Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este artigo examina a relação entre hegemonias mundiais e protesto social. O aumento do protesto social global e a incapacidade dos poderes governantes de abordar suas raízes estão entre os sinais de que entramos em uma crise de hegemonia dos Estados Unidos e em um período de profundo caos sistêmico. Esse caos sistêmico é análogo ao que caracterizou as transições da hegemonia holandesa para a britânica e da hegemonia britânica para a norte-americana. Historicamente, o surgimento de novas hegemonias pressupõe uma potência ascendente com capacidade e visão para fornecer soluções reformistas aos desafios revolucionários. Esses desafios em nível de sistema tornaram-se mais amplos e profundos de uma transição para a seguinte, levando a uma “aceleração da história social”. Devido aos limites ecológicos do capi- talismo e à mudança no equilíbrio de poder entre o Norte e o Sul globais, as soluções reformistas que (temporariamente) funcionaram no passado não são mais suficientes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".